Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (26 March) . . Page.. 668 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

road maps of the ACT. That is not just about bike paths; it is about roads that are safe to use in lieu of bike paths where those bike paths are not available. That is obviously something that is really important. On the issue of Landcare, the committee recommended that:

the Government increase the funds allocated to Landcare projects, given the strong community interest in this type of project and the obvious benefits to be gained from tapping into the enthusiasm and skills of established voluntary groups ...

But I would also like to caution the Government on this matter. Landcare groups are voluntary groups, as we all know, and I think there is an increasing tendency for governments and the community generally to rely on those groups to do an awful lot of work and in some instances, I believe, to make up for the work that the Government is not prepared to do. The whole issue of the weeds strategy comes in here now. I believe that this is a very important issue and it is one that has not been addressed by any government to date. It is one that we need to look at really seriously, because it is affecting the whole ecology of the ACT.

I think I have talked about this before. Cotoneaster, pyracantha and all the other berried weeds are actually changing the ecology in the ACT, not just in terms of the vegetation but also in terms of the birdlife and the whole balance of the birdlife in the ACT. It provides a food source for the currawongs during the winter period. This encourages the currawongs to stay in the ACT, whereas previously they would have left this area. The fact that they are here in early spring means that they eat the young of other, smaller species of native birds, and that is one of the main reasons why those other, smaller native bird species are in decline. So, I am saying that the weeds issue goes beyond vegetation. It actually is at the heart of the whole ecology of the ACT and needs to be addressed seriously. That means not just relying on Landcare groups to do as much as they can in their spare time; it actually means putting real money into this as a budgetary item, making it a real commitment, and placing real priority on this issue.

I will refer really quickly once again to the issue of a management plan for Namadgi. I have not yet seen the Government give any commitment to making this happen. It needs to happen. It needs to happen very urgently, before any of the ecotourism proposals are actually under way, because we need to be absolutely sure of what we are doing. Again, this goes back to the ESD principle of taking precautionary measures. That means that you do not set up tourism infrastructure and you do not encourage a great tourist industry in areas in and around the park that are fragile and that need management plans to tell us how those areas should be protected and what level of impact is appropriate.

I am very pleased with the recommendations in this report on the capital works program. I certainly hope that the Government takes note of these recommendations and puts them in place.

Debate (on motion by Mr Hird) adjourned.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .